Sunday, September 16, 2012

Westerners love to decry censorship aimed at them by Muslims, while ignoring the extreme censorship they impose on Muslims

Glenn Greenwaldguardian.co.uk, Sunday 16 September 2012

"....And finally leave aside the fact that all sorts of common political advocacy can be construed as "advocating violence". As noted, it is often claimed that those who denounce US wars as unjust aggression or imperialism are "emboldening" attacks on US troops and therefore inciting violence.

My real question for those who insist that advocacy of violence should be suppressed is this: do you apply this view consistently?Do you want those who advocated the attack on Iraq - i.e., who advocated violence - to be arrested? How about those who cheer for the war in Afghanistan, or drone attacks on Pakistanis and Yemenis? The next time someone in the US or UK stands up and advocates a new war - say, attacking Iran - should they be arrested on the ground that they are advocating violence?

Or is it the case, as it certainly appears, that when people say that "advocating violence" should be suppressed, what they really mean is: it should be prohibited for those people over there to advocate violence against my society, but my society is of course free to advocate violence against them?....."